One Man’s Trash Is Another Man’s Treasure: Lena Dunham, Louis C.K., and the Persistent Sexism of Comedy

Last night, after a long hiatus, Louis C.K.’s beloved comedy Louie returned with back-to-back episodes. In the second, “Model,” the following scenario plays out. A lonely, isolated rich person approaches a younger, poorer person for a sexual assignation. We’re talking about an older man and younger woman here. The rich person obviously sees something we don’t in the poorer person, who is just at their worst here—awkward and unkempt. They have sex. Things go awry. The episode is hailed as genius. Louis C.K. is welcomed back to television with open arms.

But look at the plot again. With the exception of the violent end to the episode of Louie (he accidentally clocks his sex partner in the face), doesn’t this plot bear a striking resemblance to the controversial Season 2 episode of Girls, “One Man’s Trash”? Patrick Wilson played a brownstone-dwelling man who was recently separated from his wife and is attracted to and briefly captivated by Hannah. The outcry in response to that episode was striking. With the cruel but expected Internet commentary (“Patrick Wilson is so hot he would never do Lena Dunham”) echoed by more respected, critical voices. Slate critic Daniel Engber wrote,

In sum, the episode felt like a finger poked in my guys-on-Girls eyeball, or a double-dog dare
for me to ask, How can a girl like that get a guy like this? Am I small-minded if I’m stuck on
how this fantasy is too much of a fantasy and remembering what Patrick Wilson’s real-life
partner looks like?

Louie’s assignation with the stunningly gorgeous model played by Yvonne Strahovski was met with zero public outcry. And, as far as critical commentary is concerned, the best I can find is the A.V. Club’s baffling ode to fantasy women that kicks off their review of “Model.” (That same writer, to be fair, loved “One Man’s Trash.”) The answer here is fairly obvious. It was even pointed out in that problematic Slate review. We’re conditioned to recognize and readily accept the Louis/Yvonne dynamic. “Viewers have, for generations, imagined that Al could get Peggy and Homer could get Marge and Jim Belushi could snag Courtney Thorne-Smith.” Or, to modernize the reference, that Ed O’Neill could get Sofia Vergara.

In all these instances, as well as the scenarios at play on both Girls and Louie, the presumption is that if physical attraction is not on the table (and I, for one, would never argue that C.K. and Dunham lack physical allure), then something else must be at play. Dunham made this same argument when reacting to the “One Man’s Trash” controversy:

Can you not imagine a
world in which a girl who's sexually down for anything and oddly
gregarious pulls a guy out of his shell for two days? They're not
getting married. They're spending two days [having sex], which is
something that people do.

I could definitely see someone trying to argue that C.K.’s character is more charming/endearing than Dunham’s character and could therefore, understandably, be seen as more desirable. Your mileage may vary on Hannah Horvath, but you can’t deny that she’s not at her best when Patrick Wilson’s character finds her digging through his trash. But she’s no less desirable than Louie in this episode, who, in an ill-fitting security guard’s coat, is all stammers and pratfalls and failed stand-up routines.

Why is Dunham’s attempt to paint a loving but self-skewering portrait met with jeers and rejection? Why is Louie allowed to lie to his partners, fail over and over, and blow up the trope that being a great dad means you can never lose patience? Can you imagine Hannah getting away with this?

Both of these talented writers/comedians challenge you, almost dare you, to sympathize with their characters. The comedy that you get from both Louie and Girls comes from stretching yourself to understand these messy, emotionally tumultuous people. Hannah is still something of a child; Louie is, without question, a man-child. Why is one so much harder to understand? There are certainly other differences besides gender that divide these two shows. Hannah is ostensibly poor, but she comes from a world of privilege. That can be off-putting to some. The tone of C.K.’s show is more fantasy surreality, where Girls is grounded in realism. And, of course, there’s the question of Dunham’s ever “problematic” nudity. When it comes to body image, Lena challenges you to accept her body and Louie invites you to mock his.

But, ultimately, Louis can make light of his body because of gender. It’s a different sexual game entirely for not stick-thin men than it is for women. You need only look at the complete lack of controversy around the Louie premiere to see that. Knowing C.K.’s admiration for Dunham, I can’t imagine the clear parallels between “Model” and “One Man’s Trash” are accidental and I’m not the first person to point them out. Both Matt Zoller Seitz on Vulture and Willa Paskin on Slate drew similar parallels. Both also accurately predicted the lack of backlash coming C.K.’s way.(Even if the events of “Model” are somewhat based on a true story.) Neither Hannah nor Louie should be “called out” for being out of their league. The conventional rules of attraction that television and film have imprinted on us truly don’t often translate to the real world. But the fact that one was called out and the other wasn’t is regrettable and says more about us than it does about them.

Links to articles by Matt Zoller-Seitz and Willa Paskin were added after the article was originally published.